selected quotes from The Meaning of It All: Thoughts of a Citizen-Scientist, Richard Feynman
It
is a great adventure to contemplate the universe, beyond man, to contemplate
what it would be like without man, as it was in a great part of its long
history and as it is in a great majority of places. When this objective view
is finally
attained, and the mystery and majesty of matter are fully appreciated, to
then turn the objective eye back on man viewed as matter, to view life as
part of
this universal mystery of greatest depth, is to sense an experience which
is very rare, and very exciting. It usually ends in laughter and a delight
in
the futility of trying to understand what this atom in the universe is, this
thing-atoms with curiosity-that looks at itself and wonders why it wonders.
Well, these scientific views end in awe and mystery, lost at the edge in
uncertainty, but they appear to be so deep and so impressive that the theory
that it is
all arranged as a stage for God to watch man’s struggle for good and
evil seems inadequate.
It is this conflict associated with these metaphysical aspects that is doubly
difficult because the facts conflict. Not only the facts, but the spirits
conflict. Not only are there difficulties about whether the sun does or doesn’t
rotate around the earth, but the spirit or attitude toward the facts is also
different in religion from what it is in science. The uncertainty that is necessary
in order to appreciate nature is not easily correlated with the feeling of
certainty in faith, which is usually associated with deep religious belief.
I do not believe that the scientist can have that same certainty of faith that
deeply religious people have. Perhaps they can. I don’t know. I think
that is difficult. But anyhow it seems that the metaphysical aspects of religious
have nothing to do with the ethical values, that the moral values seem somehow
to be outside of the scientific realm.
You may think that it might be possible to invent a metaphysical system for
religion which will state things in such a way that science will never find
itself in disagreement. But I do not think that it is possible to take an
adventurous and ever expanding science that is going into an unknown, and
to tell the answer
to questions ahead of time and not expect that sooner or later, no matter
what you do, you will find that some answers of this kind are wrong. So I
do not
think that it is possible to not get into a conflict if you require an absolute
faith in metaphysical aspects, and at the same time I don’t understand
how to maintain the real value of religion for inspiration if we have some
doubt as to that. That’s a serious problem.
Western civilization, it seems to me, stands by two great heritages. One
is the scientific spirit of adventure-the adventure into the unknown, an
unknown
that must be recognized as unknown in order to be explored, the demand that
the unanswerable mysteries of the universe remain unanswered, the attitude
that all is uncertain. To summarize it: humility of the intellect. The other
great heritage is Christian ethics-the basis of action on love, the brotherhood
of all men, the value of the individual, the humility of the spirit. These
two heritages are logically, thoroughly consistent. But logic is not all.
One needs one’s heart to follow an idea. If people are going back to religion,
what are they going back to? Is the modern church a place to give comfort to
a man who doubts God? More, one who disbelieves in God? Is the modern church
the place to give comfort and encouragement to the value of such doubts? So
far, haven’t we drawn strength and comfort to maintain the one or the
other of these consistent heritages in a way which attacks the values of the
other? Is this unavoidable? How can we draw inspiration to support these two
pillars of Western civilization so that they may stand together in full vigor,
mutually unafraid? That I don’t know. But that, I think, is the best
I can do on the relationship of science and religion, the religion which
has been in the past and still is, therefore, a source of moral code as well
as
inspiration to follow that code.